Rupert Murdoch is "not fit" to run a multinational corporation after demonstrating "wilful blindness" in his handling of the phone-hacking affair, which killed off his company's 168-year-old Sunday tabloid News of the World, MPs concluded today.
The News Corp boss "turned a blind eye" to what was going on at his companies and …

Re: And if that wasn't bad enough...

Re: And if that wasn't bad enough...

Murdoch is playing up his "doddering elderly man" routine whenever you see him, trying to look as pathetic as possible. The man is a sleazy, evil perversion of everything to do with journalism and business.

If you watch carefully he's only a doddery old man when it comes to answering questions about his own company. As soon as a question is asked about his detractors like David Yelland (ex editor of the Sun) or Andrew Neil (ex Times), the Mail group or the BBC, his mask slips and the poisonous old scrote emerges.

Just one rogue corporation

"This man has caused damage to this and other nations for generations."

No, polititians of both main parties have caused damage to this nation by cosying up to Murdoch in the mistaken belief that his rags might help their election campaigns. In reality Murdoch just wants to be on the winning side because that's the best way to sell newspapers.

"We conclude, therefore, that Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company."

I personally agree with that conclusion, but I'm surprised by how far reaching that statement is.

Anyway, I'm sure this will result in absolutely zero real consequences for the people responsible, NI will continue to rake in the cash, their other papers (that must have been using the same practices or at the very least have received as little attention from the Murdochs as NotW) will continue to operate without scrutiny and everything will carry on just the same.

What do you mean "other papers" - that implies that they closed NOTS, when the evidence is that they merely sacked the production staff, waited a while and rebranded it as the Scum on Sunday. So yes, everything will carry on (almost) just the same. Where things might vary is that this pleasingly direct parliamentary report will fuel the law suits on the other side of the Atlantic, where hopefully the FCPA will be brougt to bear, Leveson will add fuel to the fire.

And one other thing, ignoring the illegality, the actions of NI were unbelievably crass, self interested, and hurtful to people who in many instances were already coping with the most traumatic of events, with consequences that include forcing Milly Dowler's family to relieve every detail of her abduction and murder ten years after the event. I hope this is the end of Murdoch's career as a news tycoon, and I'm pleased that he's been rightfully vilified so that his career ends in shame and ignominy. Indeed, he's an old buzzard, and arguably his life is ending in shame and ignominy of his own making.

They won't be able to take his money off of him, but for a controlling, proud and vain man, I suspect its a far harsher punishment to build an empire like this, and then watch his reputation and that of his dynastic family trickle like sand through his own boney, grasping fingers....

Let's apply the same standard more widely

ISTM the accusation of "wilful blindness" is fitting to almost any situation where a person in power should reasonably have known what was going on. Whether that person is running a company or a government - maybe the time has come to start investigating more people, including our (ex) leaders and holding them to the same standard.

Though really this is just the start. The big question is: what happens now? Presumably all the NI/NoTW underlings who are still the subject of police charges will be duly processed, but the guy at the top will just walk away?

Re: Let's apply the same standard more widely

Hopefully the folks at Ofcom who are investigating whether News International is a fit company to own a stake in BSkyB will be paying attention. It would a national tragedy worthy of a day off work and massive street parties if NI were found unsuitable and forced to sell their stake in the company.

I wonder how many of these same MP's were previously more than happy to accept invites to meet from Murdoch in order to help them bolster their self worth / political career? Not that I think that would excuse him or his actions; but neither side have clean hands.

Quote: "The report also concluded that Les Hinton - who had been Murdoch's right-hand man for 52 years until he quit at the height of the phone hacking scandal in July 2011 - as well as NI legal boss Tom Crone and the News of the World's final editor Colin Myler had all "misled" the committee when submitting evidence to the MPs."

This paragraph says all there is to be said about the committee having any relevance and power whatsoever.

As they say in the Middle East: "The dogs can keep barking, the caravan will walk on regardless".

"apologises to everyone whose privacy was invaded"

Can this become precedent?

I think it would be a marvellous idea if all executives of large multinationals were to be vetted for fitness to run these over-powerful businesses. Of course, MPs' criteria and mine would probably differ quite dramatically (there are few bosses of multinationals that would pass my basic test of having sufficient regard for humanity).

Re: "split on party lines"

or if you look at it from the other direction Labour still haven't forgiven Murdoch/The Sun for advising their readers not to vote for them and you'd be astonished if their side didn't make that accusation. Either way its pretty stupid producing a report split down party lines and expecting us to treat it seriously.

Standard management technique

Management 101 - be unaware of things which are inconvenient. If the lynch mob got everyone fired who did this, then every company would be devoid of middle and senior managers. For grunt levels the equivalent is 'I didn't get training'.

Reporting to?

I just think it's amusing that this committee and the Leveson Inquiry both report to .... Jeremy Hunt ! In fact, if you read the appointment letters for the Assessors to the Inquiry (on the Inquiry website) you'll see that he signed them too.

It's almost like that Blackadder episode where the Lord High Executioner accidentally signs his own death warrant ...

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy

That doesn't make sense

Starting this comment by making my view on Rupert Murdoch clear so there's no chance it will be misread as some sort of defence for him - I think the man is scum and has contributed to the general f*cking up of society in this country more than almost anyone else over the last few decades. If prison sentences were dished out according to the amount of damage done rather than whether someone broke the law he would be rotting in a dark hole for the rest of his days. Now that's out of the way....

"Rupert Murdoch is "not fit" to run a multinational corporation ... MPs concluded today." That statement is just utterly f*cking stupid. Is that supposed to be a half-hearted effort to rally the News Corp shareholders into giving him the boot or just a shallow attempt to jump on the popularity of hating News International to help us forget that they've been selling out to RM and his empire for years.

He isn't a publicly elected official so the fact that he is currently doing it means that, by definition, he is fit to do it. This is a free-market economy. Capitalism. Deal with the consequences or change the rules. Don't just bitch about the fact that someone played your game better than you did. As our elected representatives, you are supposed to be making sure that the ecosystem of the UK doesn't become the sort of place where predatory corporations can run riot and you appear to be failing, probably because you're spending too much time looking after your own and removing our rights as individuals in the name of trying to protect us from ourselves.

Re: "tories still support him"....

Don't think the Tories support him, they just agree with you that they have no clue whatsoever what it takes to run a company so can't make such a pronouncement. Seems that the other parties hold no such compunctions.

They are also right that the committee did not have the scope or power to state that Murdoch is unfit in any meaningful way and so should not have done so - that's the job of OFCOM and/or Companies House (depending on the reason - both are plausible in this case).

However, they could still recommend to Parliament that he be locked up for contempt for a few years.

It concerns me that the only 'punishment' Parliament seem to be considering is simply telling him that he was a very naughty boy and really shouldn't do it again.

Stop buying his products

I haven't since he cheated the Fleet St printers out of the redundancy money which was their right. I I avoid eating and drinking in pubs which show his TV channels as much as possible. Vince Cable got it right: he is the enemy.